States must not treat ICC “as a dustbin for political has-beens,” says expert

17 December 2014 by Janet H. Anderson, New York (US)

In the run-up to the annual meeting of the International Criminal Court (ICC), held earlier this month in New York, a panel of legal experts presented recommendations for the court’s future. Tasked by a number of member states and funded by Switzerland, they critically reviewed the ICC’s last 12 years and, as lawyers who have worked in many international tribunals, suggested ways for the court to improve.

Image caption:

ICC building in The Hague (Flickr/ICC-CPI)

In October, IJT used their findings, which were presented in a report, as a lens through which to examine the ICC prosecution’s latest strategic plan. Here IJT interviews the report’s main author, defence lawyer and academic Guénaël Mettraux.

Why was this report needed?

Guénaël Mettraux (GM): We’ve reached the first decade of the ICC, and it’s a good time to make an evaluation of how it’s fared so far. Everyone, or mostly everyone, agrees that it has performed under the standards expected. A good place to start was to find the people, the time and the ideas to try to help the court, so that in 10 years it will be in better shape.

Related articles

One year ago on January 6, 2006, the 17 members of Morocco's Equity and Reconciliation Commission (IER) were closing up shop after submitting their final report to King Mohammed VI. The Moroccan truth commission had received a flood of compliments from the international community praising the recommendations in its report, especially those advocating legislative and constitutional reforms. One year later, however, the results have been rather mixed.

After having tried high-ranking officers, ministers, businessmen, priests, journalists, local officials and militiamen, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) is in uncharted waters. On September 11, the most famous rwandese troubadour of his generation will stand trial for genocide.

China is keeping a polite distance from international criminal justice. Beijing is hardly disinterested, but China does want to make sure that these new global mechanisms are not going to infringe upon its sovereignty by delving into particularly sensitive cases such as Tibet.

Over the last month, Burundi has hit the headlines as the president put himself forward to be elected for a controversial third term, resulting in street protests, thousands of refugees who fled instability and an attempted coup. Behind the issues of elections and constitutionalism are also those of justice following Burundi’s long-running civil war. The international community supported an intensive process of negotiation and the signing of the Arusha Accord in 2000. But in the decade and a half since, its provisions on justice have been debated though never fully implemented.

France's attitude towards international criminal justice is marked by ambiguity. Paris subscribes to a vision of the world in which international humanitarian law is considered a way to curb violence against civilian populations, but at the same time it is wary of an unchecked judicial system that could end up prosecuting French soldiers engaged in areas where it has old and deep-rooted interests.